We built Google for users, not websites
While we’re fortunate to have been very successful in Europe, it’s not the case that Google is “the gateway to the Internet” as the publishers suggest. Think about how people use the web today:
- To get news, you’ll probably go direct to your favorite news site. It’s why newspapers like Bild, Le Monde and the Financial Times get most of their online traffic directly (less than 15% comes from Google). Or you might follow what other people are reading on Twitter.
- To book a flight or buy a camera for your next holiday, you’re as likely go to a site like Expedia or Amazon as you are Google.
- If you’re after reviews for restaurants or local services, chances are you’ll check out Yelp or TripAdvisor
- And if you are on a mobile phone -- which most people increasingly are -- you’ll go straight to a dedicated app to check the sports scores, share your photos or look for recommendations. The most downloaded app in Europe is not Google, it is Facebook Messenger.
Nor is it true to say that we are promoting our own products at the expense of the competition. We show the results at the top that answer the user’s queries directly (after all we built Google for users, not websites). Let me give you some real-life examples.
- Ask for the weather and we give you the local weather right at the top. This means weather sites rank lower, and get less traffic. But because it’s good for users, we think that’s OK.
- It’s the same if you want to buy something (whether it’s shoes or insurance). We try to show you different offers and websites where you can actually purchase stuff -- not links to specialized search engines (which rank lower) where you have to repeat your query.
- If you’re after directions to the nearest pharmacy, you get a Google Map with the closest stores and information to get you there. Again we think that’s a great result for users.
In each case we’re trying to get you direct answers to your queries because it’s quicker and less hassle than the ten blue links Google used to show. This is especially important on mobile where screens are smaller and typing is harder. Many specialized search services don't like these improvements because they mean less traffic for them. But as European Commissioner Almunia has said: “Imposing strict equal treatment … could mean returning to the old world of Google displaying only ten undifferentiated search results - the so-called ten blue links. This would deprive European users of the search innovations that Google has introduced.”
We agree. In fact, the allegations now being made by publishers have been extensively investigated by regulators in Europe and America over more than seven years. To date, no regulator has objected to Google giving people direct answers to their questions for the simple reason that it is better for users.
Finally, it is said that Google’s success reduces our rivals’ incentives to innovate and invest, which is bad for consumers. But as the Financial Times recently reported, European media companies – including some of those behind today’s ads -- are investing heavily in specialized search engines. As Axel Springer explained in a press release announcing their most recent investments: “there’s a lot of innovation on the search market”. Economists will tell you that innovation is typically the sign of a healthy, competitive marketplace.
Posted by Eric Schmidt, Executive Chairman, Google
15 comments:
-
Thank you I explained this the other day. I also added that as a developer and I can speak for Google on this we think of the users experience and work backward. Thats how you provide the best experience . Thank you Google for thinking of us as users and developers
-
Once you started scraping sites and displaying that data as your own you stopped acting in anyone, but your own best interest.
The sentiment you are addressing her is common across users who also own websites. The quality of your search in pursuit of the info nugget had drastically declined. And your aggressive policies that used to be about punishing the spammer, now hurt the business owner and ultimately the user. A year between Penguin updates? Really?
This letter sounds defensive and so unlike the Google we once loved. You have gone from beloved innovator to scary data hoarder, site destroyer.
Face it. You jumped the shark a long time ago. Keep going this way and you'll lose any chance of recovering the positive sentiment once held about you.
To deny this may feel good now, but will ultimately be your expense. Oh and this sounds like it was written by a lawyer. -
Sehr geehrter Herr Schmidt, wie auch immer Sie es drehen und wenden. Ihr Erfolg ist aufgebaut auf der Allmende des Internets, die Sie ausbeuten ohne den Webmastern Ihren Anteil an den Werbeeinnahmen zu erstatten, den Sie auf google.com, .de etc. pp. einnehmen. Und verschieben Sie ruhig weiter Ihre Gewinne in Steueroasen, Sie werden schon noch erleben, wie es ist, wenn alle Welt ihren Verein hassen wird.
-
Pity no one will believe you.
-
Hi Eric. Google takes weather data from 3rd party websites, repackages it as its own, and sends less traffic to those sites that paid to research the weather forecast. Even if it's good for users, that's not okay.
-
Thank you Google for all you do. Furthermore, even if you were acting "anticompetitively" I would argue that any accusations were baseless simply because Google's own services are polished and in my experience far better than the competition anyway. It is always angering to me when a company does good work only for external entities to come in and tell them how to run their business.
-
To be blunt, because the publishing industry did not manage for over 10 years to come up with something users would embrace or at least see a feasible alternative to Google, they try to use the last measure: regulation. Even other players such as FB are also used, Google has a platform for search, social, news .. other companies cannot or do not provide.
-
If you don't like how Google does business don't use Google. Problem solved.
-
They why do you run paid search results? Don't ask money from website owners, ask users instead.
-
Perception is greater than truth Eric. Google is now increasingly percieved to be rewarding a plutocracy rather than supporting a meritocracy. That's no longer cool and the hoardes that depended on Google are disillusioned. Like the complaining publishers, Google too are moving up to the top floor of their ivory tower. Answer me this, who in Google decides on the best single answer (your Holy Grail)? Life is not that simple - a range of answers and trusting the users choice will always be better for humans IMO. Stop with the extreme dream of over-simplification. If I am a journalist who has sweated on a story for three months and it is then distilled into a meaningless summary without nuance, I would be quite pissed off. Split information and commercial intent down to the atomic level of a webpage - Google will be better for it. Fancy some eggs to suck grandma?
-
A print magazine is unlikely to rearrange it's typesetting depending on the reader or circumstances. Even the law can't fix that for you, dear publishers.
(I had written a longer comment but I botched the submission, please excuse me.) -
Thank you Google for what you do!!
And you "hungry bit_ches" SHUT_UP_AND_PIST_OFF!!! -
Thank you Google, for what you do! We are with you!
-
You do realize that Google pays for the weather data, they do not scrape it.
http://www.wunderground.com/about/pr/news.asp?date=20120821
"About Weather Underground
The world's first online weather service, Weather Underground is committed to delivering the most comprehensive, reliable weather information possible.
Home to more than 21 million users and weather provider to partners such as Google, The Associated Press and CBS, the company's state-of-the-art technology monitors conditions and forecasts for locations across the world. " -
Google are a monopoly, and therefore need to be treated that way by the law.